FREE PATRIOTIC MOVEMENT

Memorandum on the Current Situation in Lebanon
(the following memorandum was issued by the Free Patriotic Movement in Lebanon, early December 1999, and delivered to the foreign embassies in occupied Beirut)

Syria completed in 1990 its military control over Lebanon and went even further. It tightened its grips over the constitutional, civil and security institutions and organizations. As things stand now, Syria is in full command of the Lebanese government decisions down to the minutest detail. Therefore it is safe to assume that nothing takes place in Lebanon free of Syria’s consent.

Despite the crucial importance of peace for Lebanon, the “unified tracks” policy strips Lebanon of all margins of independence and places it under the complete hegemony of Syria. Beirut gradually drifted from the position of demanding the Israeli pull out from South Lebanon as per UN Resolution 425, and holds that no settlement shall be accepted unless the more complicated agreement between Syria and Israel over the Golan Heights is reached. The matter was complicated further by the Israeli decision to pull out from South Lebanon, unilaterally if need be, before July 7th 2000.
Against this background, and prompted by our commitment to safeguard the interests of Lebanon, and haunted by the possibility of victimizing our country as a price of a Syrian-Israeli settlement, we hold these points to be important.

On the withdrawal of the IDF from South Lebanon before July 7th, 2000
The “unified track” between Lebanon and Syria is untenable taking into consideration that Israel could at will break the link which she had earlier created when she made an agreement with Syria a condition for a pull out from South Lebanon.

The seriousness of the upcoming event holds responsible the international community- especially the states which nodded or recognized the Syrian hegemony over Lebanon. While the responsibility takes no legal form, it assumes a moral and historical nature in the absence of a Lebanese authority upholding the national interest.

The forthcoming IDF withdrawal from South Lebanon in conformity with the UN Resolution 425 will relieve Israel of the burden of occupation and lifts the stigma of violating international law. Lebanon, on the other hand, shall be placed in the uncomfortable position of violating international law should it fail to implement UN Resolution 426 and allow intrusions against Israel.

A repetition of the precedent of Jizzin and the creation of a security vacuum in South Lebanon shall in no way absolve the Lebanese government from its responsibilities towards its citizens as well as its general obligations under international law.

If, at all, there is a “unified track” it is that of the simultaneous implementation of the two UN resolutions, 425 and 426.

The only convincing proof that the Lebanese government is sincere in defending the national interests shall be by negotiating with the UN on the ways and means of deployment of the UNIFIL into areas vacated by the IDF. The failure to embark on this bare minimum shall be tantamount to drastic failure as per international law and practice.

The international community, more particularly the permanent members of the UN Security Council, remains morally and legally responsible for the proper implementation of the UN resolution 425 and 426 in full. The recent developments in the Balkan and South East Asia serve as a valid precedent for international intervention.

The Israeli pull out ends all justifications for Syria’s armed presence on the Lebanese territory and calls for the implementation without delay of the UN resolution 520. This is a prerequisite for sovereignty and independence of Lebanon without which all undertakings by the Lebanese government shall be null and void.

Syria’s insinuation that confusion and disorder would follow its troop withdrawal from Lebanon shall be interpreted as schemes to maintain its hegemony over Lebanon.

A sovereign and independent Lebanon shall be capable by its proper armed forces to undertake its obligations to make sure that its borders with Israel shall not be used for acts of aggression. The only auxiliary troops to be contemplated would be a UN force of support.

Our Understanding of Peace
The Free Patriotic Movement considers the following 13 theses as the basis of a permanent regional peace:

Thesis # 1: Peace between states and peoples ought to be the goal of all political and diplomatic activities. Peace is more than the negation of war.

Thesis # 2: Peace for Lebanon is a matter of existence and an utmost need. The earlier it is achieved the more sufferings and losses it spares the already destitute Lebanon.

Thesis #3 The current chances of peace, an obvious function of a unique regional and international favorable developments, offer a serious chance to all parties to the Middle East conflict which no party has the right to waste.

Thesis #4: Any settlements which fail to safeguard Lebanon’s rights to sovereignty, freedom and independence (as per UN resolutions 425, 426 and 520) constitute a violation of the collective rights of the Lebanese and might lead to a state of instability.

Thesis #5:Lebanon, which experienced for long bloodshed, disorder, aggression on its territories and from its territories, should reaffirm its commitment as a member of the international community foremost of which figures the right of all states and nations to live in peace and security free of any aggression or threat of aggression no matter from what source.

Thesis #6:Terrorism in its widest sense shall remain the major threat to the safety and stability of the states and peoples of the Middle East. The victims of the Middle East terrorism are not confined to the region but include the interests and citizens of countries all over the world. All the states of the region, Lebanon included, should spare no effort to eradicate terrorism. An effective framework of regional and international cooperation should be contemplated. Acts of terror shall be placed outside the framework of general amnesty and no statute of limitations shall be applied to acts of terror. (1) (2)

Thesis # 7: As peace is more than the absence of war and acts of hostility, we understand a Middle East peace to open the doors wide open for the cooperation and all forms of exchange (economic, cultural, tourist, social etc.) between the peoples and individuals of the region. Settlements that fail to achieve this goal are no settlements at all.

Thesis # 8: Spreading the culture of democracy, human rights and the rule of law serves as the basis for stability and development in the Middle East region. It is also a precondition for a value system common to all the countries of the region. The Lebanese people, who respects these universal values, has an edge over others in promoting these values. (3)(4)(5)(6)

Thesis # 9: Some of the first dividends of a comprehensive Middle East peace shall be the end of squandering the human and economic resources of the region in useless and absurd wars. Instead, a peace would help to channel the wealth of the region and promote developments across the board, which, itself, shall bolster stability and sustain peace.

Thesis # 10:The Euro-Mediterranean framework of cooperation is an excellent launching pad for Lebanon and the other Middle East countries to lay the ground work for cooperation in all fields, political, economic, technological, environment and cultural. This framework could serve as an instrument of promoting democratic values and human rights as the Statutes of Association as well as the various Declarations make human rights and democracy a necessary precondition for partnership in EU.

Thesis # 11:Cooperation on the regional and the Euro-Mediterranean levels imposes on all parties a degree of exposure on the cultural wealth of the others; languages, artistic expressions, and civilizations. Lebanon, just like all the other countries of the region, shall commit itself to the logic and culture of peace and integrate this culture in its political discourse and the national education programs.

Thesis # 12: The resettlement of the already residing Palestinian refugees in Lebanon shall shake the demographic balance of the communal system of Lebanon and would call for reconsidering the very basis and form of the Lebanese state. (7) (8)

Thesis # 13: It is the duty of Lebanon to insist on an active part in the Middle East multi-party negotiations, particularly those related to the refugees and the water.(9)

All acts of terror, which were launched from Lebanon, had behind them a foreign party or state.
It is unlawful to pardon the terrorists at a time when crimes against humanity are being prosecuted all over the world.
No wars are recorded between states run by democratically elected governments. All wars have dictatorial regimes as all or some of the parties to the conflict.
In the course of the past 100 years no starvation ravaged a country run by a democratically elected government with a free press.
The common system of values was at the basis of the European Community.
The statement which was taken for its face value since the sixties is no more tenable. It is not true that an inevitable choice must be made between civil freedoms and development. It is now established beyond a shade of doubt that no economic development can take place in the absence of civil rights.
In comparison, resettlement of Palestinians in Lebanon would amount to the increase of some 17 million newcomer to France and 60 millions to the US.

A serious settlement of the Palestinian refugees’ problem, including those residing in Lebanon) can only be the function of serious and constructive negotiation and cooperation between the host countries, the National Palestinian Authority, Israel, the US and the European Union.

The Middle East is the part of the world where water is in very short supply. The only realistic solution shall be regional cooperation, which includes Turkey, the substantial water reservoir of the Middle East.
The Free Patriotic Movement
.==================================================================